2014 MNDNR Roundtable

[SkunkedAgain]

I'd advise anyone that is shooting arrows at this messenger (Dtro) to get involved in a worthy organization so that they can go to the roundtable discussion themselves.

Thanks for sharing what you heard Dtro. I appreciate reading about it.

[mallardnwalleye]

Dtro- Thanks for going and spending the time at the meeting and reporting what happened.

We all have our specific outdoor interests and issues over those with the DNR but I think we all need to work with them within their protocol of decision making.

Was there any discussion of the gating and limiting of access for fishermen on MPLS Lakes? Or the attempts and implementation of limiting access on other lakes?

What was said about AIS inspections and treatments?

What concrete ideas and solutions did they have about the Pike problem?

What things can we as the general fishing public stakeholders do to get our opinions and voices heard so that we can create change?

Thanks again!

[DTro]

Honestly I don't know a good direct route to get an invite. There were presidents and members of sports clubs, firearms instructors, resort owners, media reporters, legislators, and guys like me who are part of a fish species charter workgroup (catfish in my case). This year they also invited a small group of students who majoring in some sort of outdoor/wildlife related career.

As far as I remember, there were no specific presentations on gates at launches. In fact I was really surprised at the level of AIS discussion overall. It was pretty low key compared to last year I think. We did have one presentation on Asian Carp which was basically just an overview of where the Northern spawning border currently is and the steps the DNR is taking towards first trying to identify if we have a population here, and if they are spawning. Both of which they haven't found hard evidence of, which is good.

[Down Deep]

If someone would like an invitation to this Round Table or any other limited attendance meeting you should contact your local MN representatives to the House or Senate. Might take some minimal lobbying, but they are usually thrilled that a regular citizen is interested to take time and participate in a meeting. Most of the time they have to deal with lobbiest who have a special interest who clamor for the invites.

[DTro]

After the presentations are over for the day, they have sessions called the “Front Porch” and “Back Porch” (one for wildlife and one for fisheries).   This is the part in which we stakeholders get to discuss among ourselves the issues we are facing and perhaps voice our concerns to the very people that steer the things important to us.  This isn’t a very long session and lasts about 1.5 hours.   It was mainly dominated by discussion about guide licensing, walleyes, mille lacs lake, AIS, and the Pike issue. 

 

At the very end SteveD got in a few words for the Catfishermen.  Thanks to BrianK for capturing these moments.  It gives you a small idea of what goes on during the Back Porch

[delcecchi]

If someone would like an invitation to this Round Table or any other limited attendance meeting you should contact your local MN representatives to the House or Senate. Might take some minimal lobbying, but they are usually thrilled that a regular citizen is interested to take time and participate in a meeting. Most of the time they have to deal with lobbiest who have a special interest who clamor for the invites.

[delcecchi]

For some writeup, check

http://blogs.twincities.com/outdoors/201...dmits-mistakes/

and

https://www.dropbox.com/s/us6eo8kefollvca/Drake%20Mille%20Lacs%20RoundTable%202014.pptx

(if you don't have latest powerpoint, Libre Office, free, will display the slides)

[DTro]

That was a very accurate summary and was well written. Melissa's PowerPoint is very interesting as well andI would encourage everyone to take a look at at it.

As far as the open meeting law, I'm not sure that applies here.

[delcecchi]

Sure seems like the open meeting law would apply. That doesn't mean that anyone can speak or participate, but they could attend.

But I really don't know the nuance of the law.

I also thought the slides were extremely interesting with a lot of data that folks here should look at.

[TyGuy02]

thanks for the update Dtro! The meat mongers would be all over an increased bag limit of pike, and maybe that would be a start to help with a solution. Many of the lakes in my area of NW MN will produce a catch rate of 30 small (<20") and medium (20-30") pike to 1 walleye. This is not an exaggeration!

I would be 100% on board with an increased bag limit on pike with a state-wide slot on lakes without an individual-lake pike slot (ie URL, LOTW, ect). I agree that pike make as good of table fare as any other species when taken from cold water (spring/winter/fall), and only really lose eat-ability when water temps are quite warm.

Pike bag limit of 8 for the size of less than 30", limit of 1 for 30" plus.

[candiru]

I have mentioned this before, but what about 3(maybe more) "bonus" northerns under 20-ish inches?

[gunner55]

On the Bowstring/Sand chain we have had a keep 9 program in place for a few years now.I think it's been around 5 yrs maybe a little more of 9 @ < 22",o from 22"-36" & 1 over 36".It seems to be working from what I have seen & heard.I'm catching far fewer of the "hammerhandles" & have actually caught(on Sand) a couple over 30"(released) the last couple of seasons.The DNR says that the sampling they do shows much of the same.

[Nick Kuhn]

I think preventing harvest of large pike (by slot) is a good way of doing things. I am not 100% certain that simply encouraging harvest of small pike is the answer. I think for that idea to work, pike need to be thinned out before they get to the size we typically catch. Nobody is going to be keeping 8 to 12 inch pike. But uf there is a neverending supply of 20" pike, you can be assured there is also a neverending supply that's even smaller. So short of DNR netting a few years to thin out yearlings, I think encouraging angler harvest of small pike is like shoveling while it is still snowing.

[laker1]

They tried on some lakes with expanded northern pike take under a certain size,after a while most people won't bother taking the small ones,it doesn't hurt tho to have the expanded number under a certain size.

[DTro]

New Minnesota DNR fisheries chief Don Pereira tries  to answer the unanswerable: What's wrong with Mille Lacs walleyes?

Q: What’s the status of Mille Lacs walleyes?

A: We have an abundance of spawning females. But there’s an elevated mortality of young walleyes, and we’re not sure why. Walleyes are in the lake in good numbers after the spawn, but they’re not surviving in sufficient numbers as yearlings and 2-year-olds. We haven’t had a notable year class since 2008, and good year classes before then were too infrequent.

 

Q: Reasons?

A: Our leading hypothesis is that they are probably dying from elevated predation. Mille Lacs became clearer and clearer beginning in the late 1990s. At the same time, we detected that walleyes were moving offshore at a much smaller size than they historically have. We think that the clearer water, and the predation that it might have encouraged, might have been the reason. Meanwhile, we know that smallmouth bass in the lake have increased dramatically, as have larger walleyes and northern pike, all of which prey at times on small walleyes. That said, we’re unsure exactly how these things work together.

 

Q: When might you figure it out?

A: We had a good predator diet study this year. But fish feed differently, year by year. We’ll get an initial look at which predators are consuming young walleye this year, but will certainly firm up this work with additional years of predator diet sampling.

 

Q: Have Mille Lacs regulations protected too many big walleyes, which in turn feed on small walleyes?

A: It’s possible. But I want to stress that Mille Lacs appears to be unique in that regard. We’ve had similar protective slots on Rainy Lake for 20 years and on Winnie for 10 years. We’re still seeing good reproduction on those lakes, without loss of year classes as the fish mature. But regarding Mille Lacs, the mistake we might have made was focusing fishing mortality on walleyes 15-18 inches long. We now know a sustainable fishery should be exploited across a broad age and size range.

 

Q: On Mille Lacs, harvest quotas for anglers and Chippewa netters are set by poundage. So if you allow more big walleyes to be kept, quotas will be reached more quickly.

A: True. But first we need to focus on getting the system recovered. As we do that, or when we do, we’ll have to spread harvest across a broader size of fish. How the bands accomplish that, we don’t know. We don’t know how we’ll do it, either. Again, there’s a degree of speculation in what I’m saying, because we haven’t completed all of our research.

 

Q: Do you envision angler regulations changing on Mille Lacs this year, from an 18- to 20-inch harvest slot, with one allowed over 28 inches, and a two-fish bag?

A: We hope to keep it where it is, but nothing is on the table right now. It appears the bite will be slow, because yellow perch are abundant for forage. We will meet with the Mille Lacs advisory committee and discuss it.

 

Q: Why are you using outside experts to look at the lake?

A: Fisheries science is complex. Sometimes it’s good to have a fresh look. The people at Michigan State, for instance, have studied our Mille Lacs model and have given us feedback. Another expert we’re working with is highly knowledgeable in walleye mortality. Another knows zebra mussels and their relation to clearer water, increased plant growth and pike predation. I’m excited about the intellectual power we’re bringing to the issue.

 

Q: What have you told the Chippewa about your assessment of the lake and your plans?

A: We’ve kept them informed. They’re supportive, and and the Federal court is clear that the State can only object to tribal interests for reasons of conservation or health and human safety.

 

Q: Is there hope for a walleye rebound?

A: I think so. Most vexing are the ecological changes. There’s just a lot going on in that lake. Additionally, it was a sort of a perfect storm when the tribal fishery began at the same time the lake began changing.

 

Q: Some observers have advocated shutting down the lake to walleye harvests to let the fishery recover.

A: I don’t want to speculate about that. We will do everything we can to sustain resorts and area businesses while we figure this thing out. The state tourism people will help by stressing the diversity of attractions in the area while we work on the walleye issue.

 

Q: Talk about northern pike.

A: Milfoil has expanded dramatically in the lake, out to 18-foot depths. We know pike like plants. Does the plant expansion explain why pike have increased? If we think it does, we may promote the lake’s pike fishery.

 

Q: Are smallmouth bass eating the small walleyes?

A: We won’t prosecute a particular fish until we find out it’s a problem. There’s not a lot of literature that says smallies prey disproportionately on walleyes. Though July, their diet in Mille Lacs is mostly on crayfish.

 

Q: Do you have the money and staff to do what you need to do on Mille Lacs?

A: We’re taking money from other projects. We’re pulling staff from throughout the state. It’s a huge problem and it’s worthy of a lot of attention.

 

Q: Finally, do muskies play a role?

A: The lake’s muskies are low-density. We manage muskies statewide for one fish per 4 acres. On Mille Lacs, it’s one fish per 50 acres. If you’re a muskie angler, you won’t catch a lot of fish in Mille Lacs. But if you do, chances are good it’s longer than 50 inches.

 

Dennis Anderson [email protected]

[delcecchi]

If you really are interested, download and look at the powerpoint presentation that I posted the link for. It has a whole bunch of real data in it, and covers the problem well.

[JP Z]

I would also like to bring up on the topic of Mille Lacs water quality, the spiny Water Fleas.....they are plankton feeders and unless you are a deep water long line troller you probably didn't know there was that big of a population of them out there.......these just as much as the Zebes are probably hurting (helping) the clarity.

[Mid-Lake Rock]

Doug Smith of the Star Tribune wrote a column in today's sports section about small pike.

[delcecchi]

I guess we will see who has more clout with the legislature, walleye fishermen and the DNR or the Harpooners of the Minnesota Darkhouse Association.

[merkman]

Doug Smith of the Star Tribune wrote a column in today's sports section about small pike.

Shoulda seen that coming. ...

Rally the troops.... more needless regulations are on their way.....

So where we at so far.... no winter fishing (not even catch and release) muskies, smallmouth, and flatheads....

We are doing a better job shutting down seasons than those who are against us....

Looks like the northern pike is next.....

ughhhhh.

.

[B420]

But Merk, if you are truly interested in taking a bunch of 17-22" fish like you previously stated, this would increase your opportunities would it not?

[merkman]

But Merk, if you are truly interested in taking a bunch of 17-22" fish like you previously stated.....

You obviously don't know me nor have ever fished with me.

By the way B420... how's your Minnesota wintertime catch and release muskie fishing season going so far?

Ohhhh yeah... There isn't one because it has been shut down... by fellow sportsmen.

You do know that is where all this is headed right?

.

[DTro]

I can’t speak for Muskies or Smallies, however since you brought it up, I was very involved with the Flathead thing and it was a very easy regulation to support. 

 

I’ve always also been a big supporter of continuous catch and release regulations throughout the entire year. It makes sense to me and I don’t think we should discourage people from being out there wetting a line for fun.  But, when it came to Flatheads and knowing what I know about the seasonal slumber they partake in which leaves them very vulnerable to harvest it was a no brainer for me to support.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again,  if people want to go out and snag catfish for fun and throw them back, then go for it.  I wouldn’t consider you a fisherman then, but whatever, it is what it is.

 

Personally, I was more concerned about the harvest and potential for people to really take advantage of their tight schooling and “hibernation like” state of the Flathead in the winter.      Harvesting and eating fish is not a bad thing, in fact we should probably encourage it more with some species, but overharvest, greed, and gluttony,  certainly is and when the regulations allows for you to legally be a glutton, a change might need to be made.  In this case it was and I appreciate the fact that the DNR was willing to listen and work with us

[B420]

Merk,

I wouldn't know how the winter time catch and release muskie season is going, as the season closed Dec.1 which is perfectly fine with me. And no, I guess I don't now where all this is going.

I have no problem with the DNR shutting down the season for vulnerable fish such as flatheads in the winter.

[merkman]

Yes DTro you and I have been through this conversation.

I do not have a problem with your intent... i do have a problem with the method you and the other members of special interest groups chose to get to the protection you felt was needed.

Many other ways to go about the protection you talk of without closing down the catch and release season. And by the way... All these criminals you speak of.... you better believe they are jigging the same holes "fishing for a different species"...... so as far as effectiveness.... IMHO not worth closing down yet another season.....

but each to their own....

.